] again. To them it's just the inherent problem of market
] economies, but there's got to be a way around this besides
] cumbersome planned economies. Ideas??
One problem is that the analysts aren't objective. They are too tied into everything. Its more then just the auditors doing the accounting, its the investment banks doing the IPOs. There needs to be more checks and balances in the way the financial system is organized.
I think that one could fund a non profit analyst firm. The guys are simply not allowed to own stocks or do anything but publish, and the publications are free. Like an NPR for detailed market analysis. One way to do this would be through government funding, but then it gets political. If it was totally independant, well funded, and properly staffed, then it might provide a reasonable buffer against instability.
A easier solution would be to fund a buffer organization which simply runs advertisements on financial news programs that present information counter to the grain of the market direction WHATEVER that may be. An organization that is specifically intended to identify and fight market irrationality.
Another thing, which has been discussed here before, is the need for strong economic leadership from the top. The president needs to make people FEEL confident that things are under control and moving forward, and there are things to look forward too and work for. This president is not doing this at all.
However, sometimes you just CAN'T tell whats going to happen. Look at telecom right now.
1. Will wireless eliminate the demand for pots lines?
2. What will drive domestic broadband demand? VoIP, Online Games, a solution to the copyright problem? If any, then when, exactly?
3. Will WiFi or 3G win the coming wireless wars?
4. Will asset based telecom take off? To what extent?
5. If/when 2 happens, how rapidly will the RBOCs shift to an IP based infrastructure? Will Nortel and Lucent be able to translate the IP oriented companies they bought during the boom into products that will meet this demand, or will Cisco or a startup snap up all of this stuff?
6. Will the "stupid net" actually prevail, or will demand for higher quality synchronous communications and better network security lead to something more like ATM? If the later, then how will things evolve in that direction from the existing IP based network? (Will MPLS and RSVP provide similar capability? Will the service providers prefer to give priority to packets based on who sent them rather then on what they contain?)
These are all interesting things to think about. Lots of people seem to have strong opinions, but I don't buy it. It seems like trying to figure out who was going to own the PC market in 2002 by looking at the situation in 1982. We might be able to make some technological predictions, but the social situation, and which companies will do the right things.... thats almost impossible to predict accurately.
RE: Telecommunications layoffs mount worldwide